Toggle sidebar

MDZ in SJ?

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
JeffMangum said:
OT, but jesus, Bergeron
Click to expand...

Was gonna put something in the post about how good Bergeron is because I was taken aback, too. What a stud.

slipknottin said:
Lmao. A player usage chart is your evidence? Please. That's not evidence of how good a player is at all, and you know it.
Click to expand...

I said John Moore is sheltered. I proved it.

The fact that he's starting in the offensive zone against ****** players, yet still letting opponents get pucks on Hank (which, if your "eye test" disagrees with means you need a trip to the optometrist) shows that he's bad.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
Here's the Rangers player usage chart.

e9j3.png


You see that guy all the way on the bottom right? That's John Moore. That means he faced the weakest competition on the team and also got the 2nd most offensive zone starts (besides Brad Richards). As you can also see, his circle is not blue, which means he struggled to help the team get the puck and attack with it. Before you say "but I want my d-men to defend!!!11" the fact that he's starting so many shifts in the offensive zone, yet he's still bad at getting the puck, means that the opposition is getting the puck into our zone and putting pucks on net when he's on the ice.

For comparison, here's Boston (the only team in the East better than us this year)--

cfld.png


I don't see any defender nearly as bad as John Moore here, do you? Krug faced soft competition and got a ton of o-zone starts: he also dominated possession.

edit- Forgot to mention Kevan Miller. Kevan Miller is not a very good NHL d-man, would you say? Yet he's very comparable to John Moore.

John Moore is NOT a good hockey player.
Click to expand...

So you're going to use the "advanced stats" to show that he faced a poor QoC but ignore the ones such as corsi that show he was a net positive when he was on the ice with his 51.6% last year? One stat does not tell all in hockey...you have to look at a combination of things. Blindly looking at one number and taking it as fact and repeating it over and over does not make it correct.
 
He's got really great vision and has one of the best outlet passes in the game...when he is playing well. Unfortunately, that has not been very often. His offensive upside is through the roof, but I doubt he will ever get where he could be in terms of points. His D is spotty at best, although he is pretty tough and throws some nice hits from time to time.
 
JeffMangum said:
It's been explained numerous times

The chart shows that Moore is coddled like a child yet still barely has an impact on our possession game
Click to expand...

No, it's been inferred.

It has not been explained.

Personally I think these advanced stats are for people who can't tell their ass from their elbow and make things up instead of learning to watch the game
 
I will say this about Moore

He's not very good now, but at least he is still young and has all the tools to be an effective player out there
 
slipknottin said:
No, it's been inferred.

It has not been explained.

Personally I think these advanced stats are for people who can't tell their ass from their elbow and make things up instead of learning to watch the game
Click to expand...

Or you could just use both.

But, no, I DON'T LIKE THEM SO THEY MEAN NOTHING.
 
SA16 said:
So you're going to use the "advanced stats" to show that he faced a poor QoC but ignore the ones such as corsi that show he was a net positive when he was on the ice with his 51.6% last year? One stat does not tell all in hockey...you have to look at a combination of things. Blindly looking at one number and taking it as fact and repeating it over and over does not make it correct.
Click to expand...

51.6% given the most sheltered minutes on the team.

I showed Krug, who got similarly soft minutes, dominates possession.

If John Moore didn't put a positive Corsi, however miniscule, in his cushy minutes he wouldn't be an NHL player. He has room to grow, of course, but right now he is NOT good. Del Zotto faced marginally tougher competition with marginally less OZone starts, and had a VERY marginally lower CF%. They're interchangeable at best, but since DZ has shown success in the past i'd be more inclined to replace Moore with him.

That's nice, but I don't give a crap.
Click to expand...

Also, HUGE LOL at "i don't give a ****" about sheltered minutes, when my argument hinges entirely on how soft his minutes are. Why are we even arguing then? Go ahead and think John Moore isn't a bad d-man while MDZ is a plague on humanity, for whatever wacky reasons you want.
 
Conclusion

Corsi is an estimate and contains considerable error. Over a full season of about 80 games/1200 minutes, even if Corsi production rates were fixed, Corsi/60 for individual players would have a 95% Confidence Interval of about +/- 4.8. However, Corsi production rates are highly variable. Monte Carlo analysis suggests that the Corsi/60 of individual players playing a full season has a 95% Confidence Interval of about +/- 13.7. The 95% confidence interval of Corsi% is about 43.2% to 56.8%

In part 3 I will look at this issue using a different technique.


From the article I posted above
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
51.6% given the most sheltered minutes on the team.

I showed Krug, who got similarly soft minutes, dominates possession.

If John Moore didn't put a positive Corsi, however miniscule, in his cushy minutes he wouldn't be an NHL player. He has room to grow, of course, but right now he is NOT good. Del Zotto faced marginally tougher competition with marginally less OZone starts, and had a VERY marginally lower CF%. They're interchangeable at best, but since DZ has shown success in the past i'd be more inclined to replace Moore with him.



Also, HUGE LOL at "i don't give a ****" about sheltered minutes, when my argument hinges entirely on how soft his minutes are. Why are we even arguing then? Go ahead and think John Moore isn't a bad d-man while MDZ is a plague on humanity, for whatever wacky reasons you want.
Click to expand...

I'll just watch Moore play as a bottom pair DMan for the rangers all year while DZ will probably get scratched half the year.

But if you think your advanced stats (which don't even actually support your own argument, ironically) are a better gauge, then have at it
 
SA16 said:
Conclusion

Corsi is an estimate and contains considerable error. Over a full season of about 80 games/1200 minutes, even if Corsi production rates were fixed, Corsi/60 for individual players would have a 95% Confidence Interval of about +/- 4.8. However, Corsi production rates are highly variable. Monte Carlo analysis suggests that the Corsi/60 of individual players playing a full season has a 95% Confidence Interval of about +/- 13.7. The 95% confidence interval of Corsi% is about 43.2% to 56.8%

In part 3 I will look at this issue using a different technique.


From the article I posted above
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

So shall we go back to last season, where John Moore was ALSO coddled and had a marginal Corsi given his minutes?

You're right, stats can be variable. However, if you take everything you can of John Moore's Rangers tenure, you have a guy who can handle the charmin soft minutes he gets without crippling the team, but he does nothing much of benefit.
 
slipknottin said:
I'll just watch Moore play as a bottom pair DMan for the rangers all year while DZ will probably get scratched half the year.

But if you think your advanced stats (which don't even actually support your own argument, ironically) are a better gauge, then have at it
Click to expand...

You can watch Tanner Glass play NHL hockey, too, while you're at it.

Clearly Dan Bylsma's (and AV's, but I like AV so I don't wanna **** on him) eyes are a better gauge than everything else.
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
Fair enough.

So shall we go back to last season, where John Moore was ALSO coddled and had a marginal Corsi given his minutes?

You're right, stats can be variable. However, if you take everything you can of John Moore's Rangers tenure, you have a guy who can handle the charmin soft minutes he gets without crippling the team, but he does nothing much of benefit.
Click to expand...

He played 13 games that year...
 
BlueshirtBlitz said:
You can watch Tanner Glass play NHL hockey, too, while you're at it.

Clearly Dan Bylsma's (and AV's, but I like AV so I don't wanna **** on him) eyes are a better gauge than everything else.
Click to expand...

Lmao. Is that seriously the defense you are using?

Look at all the nhl teams lining up to sign MDZ.
 
SA16 said:
He played 13 games that year...
Click to expand...

I can keep going back. This is the first year he's played serious NHL time consistently, but every season here and in CBJ has either had him with really soft minutes doing nothing, or slightly harder minutes getting dominated.

Given what we have so far, he is not good.
 
JeffMangum said:
I will say this about Moore

He's not very good now, but at least he is still young and has all the tools to be an effective player out there
Click to expand...

My "interesting" Stats:


John Moore - 75% chance he's out of the league within 5 years.

MDZ - 75% chance he's out of the league within 2 years.


John Moore -3% chance he's playing 2nd pairing regularly in the future.

MDZ - 6% chance he's playing 2nd pairing regularly in the future.

John Moore - 0-1% chance once gone from the NHL will return.

MDZ -5% chance will return to NHL after an hiatus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom